Renewed War on Drugs, harsher charging policies, stepped-up criminalization of immigrants — in the current climate, joining the NACDL is more important than ever. Members of NACDL help to support the only national organization working at all levels of government to ensure that the voice of the defense bar is heard.
Take a stand for a fair, rational, and humane criminal legal system
Contact members of congress, sign petitions, and more
Help us continue our fight by donating to NFCJ
Help shape the future of the association
Join the dedicated and passionate team at NACDL
Increase brand exposure while building trust and credibility
NACDL is committed to enhancing the capacity of the criminal defense bar to safeguard fundamental constitutional rights.
NACDL harnesses the unique perspectives of NACDL members to advocate for policy and practice improvements in the criminal legal system.
NACDL envisions a society where all individuals receive fair, rational, and humane treatment within the criminal legal system.
NACDL’s mission is to serve as a leader, alongside diverse coalitions, in identifying and reforming flaws and inequities in the criminal legal system, and redressing systemic racism, and ensuring that its members and others in the criminal defense bar are fully equipped to serve all accused persons at the highest level.
Showing 1 - 15 of 95 results
Amendment 821, made retroactive by the Sentencing Commission, in part “limits the overall criminal history impact of ‘status points’ (i.e., the additional criminal history points given to defendants for the fact of having committed the instant offense while under a criminal justice sentence, including probation, parole, supervised release, imprisonment, work release, or escape status).”
For a long time, DeCedrick Walker thought of himself as damaged goods. Later, he used writing to help handle anger, depression, shame, and personal affronts.
Eugenicists argued that criminality was inherited and said the only way to stop the spread of crime was to stop criminals from reproducing. To accomplish this goal, they advocated for long prison sentences that would effectively prevent individuals from reproducing. Daniel Loehr urges criminal defense attorneys to use this disturbing history when representing clients charged under habitual offender laws to develop constitutional challenges and educate the court.
Originalism as the Defense Attorney's Friend: Expanding Sixth Amendment Rights
'Statutory' Enhancement by Judicial Notice of Danger: Who Needs Legislators or Jurors?
Presumptively Unreasonable: Using The Sentencing Commission's Words To Attack The Advisory Guidelines
Mitigation In The Death Belt - Twelve Steps To Saving Clients' Lives
This month Deborah J. Blum reviews Alan Ellis’ Federal Prison Guidebook: Prison, Sentencing, and Post-Conviction Remedies (2025-2026 ed.) by Alan Ellis, Mark H. Allenbaugh, and Walt Pavlo.
To effectively advocate for immigrant clients, lawyers and criminal mitigation experts should uncover psychosocial information that pertains to defendants’ lives before coming to the United States and challenges encountered as first-generation immigrants.
The U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Policy Statement allowing sentence reductions for defendants who received an “unusually long sentence” faces an uncertain future after the 2024 Third Circuit decision in United States v. Rutherford.
Elizabeth Unger Carlyle recaps the criminal, habeas, and prisoner civil rights cases of the 2024-2025 Term.
NACDL and advocacy groups are no longer alone in decrying draconian sentencing policies. With leadership coming from the top of the Justice Department and bipartisan support emerging in Congress, there is real hope that the United States may finally begin to undo the plague of mass incarceration.
The First Step Act was designed to incentivize prisoners to participate in recidivism-reducing programs and activities so that when released, they would return to their communities in a better position and would not reoffend and return to prison. So, where is the FSA going wrong?
The Sixth and Seventh Circuits invalidated the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Policy Statement allowing for sentence reductions for defendants who received an “unusually long sentence.” At issue were “compassionate release” sentence reductions.